The Formal Launching of the Potter’s House: Why?
“Christian fathers have been sold a bill of goods. They have been told by the inept Christian academia of our day that they are not qualified to teach their families the word of God. Supposedly, the academiacs are the experts, but all they have done is regurgitated Reformed orthodoxy and tradition for hundreds of years.”
I became a Christian in Dallas, TX circa 1982. I was pursued by a young Christian zealot named Mark Cline. Mark was an individual whose life commanded respect from the saved and unsaved alike. Mark was a member of the Prestonwood Baptist mega-church located in Plano, TX during its infancy. I often visited with Mark and associated with the young singles group there. Mark died unexpectedly during minor surgery; an event that facilitated my full commitment to Christ. I now know why God took Mark home; the insidious scandals that where revealed at Prestonwood shortly after Marks death would have absolutely crushed him. The infamous womanizing founder of the church, Dr. Bill Weber, who Mark had infinite respect for actually conducted Mark’s funeral.
I moved on and eventually joined Richardson East Baptist Church where my calling to the ministry was formally recognized four years later. The pastors that participated are men of qualities hard to find in our day—that means a lot to me. But as one who grew up in the faith as a Southern Baptist, being Protestant has always been the greatest challenge in maintaining my faith. How can I still have complete faith in God and His Son after all that I have witnessed among Southern Baptists? It can only be chalked up to saving faith.
Recently, I have finally concluded what the problem is. It’s our foundation. Protestantism itself is the problem. First of all, it was founded on the false gospel of progression justification; that was Luther and Calvin’s gospel. Protestantism is a religion founded on a false gospel—it’s just that simple. Empowering the laity and starting home fellowships is not a radical alternative, it’s the only solution. “That’s throwing out the baby with the bathwater!” Absolutely, the baby is a Nephilim. That’s what Christians have to come to grips with in our day: the Western church was built on a faulty foundation. The only true road to revival is a rebuilding on the authority of God’s word. The anemic American church’s lust for control and indifference to spiritual abuse does not happen in a vacuum—it happens because of the pagan foundation it is built on.
Thank goodness for the New Calvinism movement. It is responsible for drawing attention to the real problem. Authentic tyrannical Reformation doctrine oscillates between the weakness/easy believeism that it created and New Calvinist resurgences claiming that the full dose of the disease is the cure for Calvinism Light. The president of Southern Seminary recently stated that Reformed theology in the form of New Calvinism is the “only alternative” for the present condition of the church. He failed to mention that Reformed theology is responsible for the present condition of the church to begin with.
In contrast, Susan and I have learned more about Christianity in the past six months than we have in the combined eighty years of our Christian lives. And I wonder if we haven’t had a bigger impact in the lives of others than we ever have as well. This is the result of merely studying the Bible for ourselves, and with the minds God gave us. But the statement by Al Mohler really incited me to make the Potter’s House an official church. Susan and I have filed the necessary papers with the state of Ohio. The Potter’s House will operate as a non-profit organization under TTANC L.L.C. (a non-profit LLC). Our Sunday evening Bible study will start at 7PM and will be streamed live weekly. All are invited to join us.
We endeavor to incite others to be the alternative to the formal church’s present-day tyranny and arrogance born of the Reformation. Christian fathers have been sold a bill of goods. They have been told by the inept Christian academia of our day that they are not qualified to teach their families the word of God. Supposedly, the academiacs are the experts, but all they have done is regurgitated Reformed orthodoxy and tradition for hundreds of years.
We hope to publish materials that will aid the laity in teaching their families the word of God. We hope this will be a major thrust of our ministry. Our present materials can be found at tancpublishing.com. We also have plans to start a Bible Institute as well.
Our new church website address is freebereans.blogspot.com. It is also the location of our live feed for the Sunday Bible studies.
Because only truth sanctifies,
Paul and Susan Dohse

I still don’t see how that makes it progressive. If progressive means gradually advancing in extent, advancing, increasing, or improving, how does the perfect work of Christ that is imputed to believers progress?
LikeLike
Because the plural workS of Christ are not imputed to us. Only one obedient act of Christ justified us–His obedience to the cross. Nothing of Christ was imputed to us for our justification–OUR SIN WAS IMPUTED TO CHRIST. The Father’s righteousness apart from the law was imputed to us. The Holy Spirit’s work in justification was to set us apart when the Father elected us. That is *definitive sanctification. Calvinists make definitive sanctification progressive as well. They also combine works with justification for a progressive imputation of Christ’s works to maintain justification.
LikeLike
Why don’t you just say Calvinist believe in perpetual justification? That seems to be a more accurate description of what they believe.
LikeLike
I want to play directly on one of the Calvinist filthy deceptions of calling their progressive justification, “progressive sanctification.” That’s why. In regard to daily re-salvation–it’s that also.
LikeLike
In light of what you said above, what do you think is the purpose of Jesus appearing in God’s presence for us?
LikeLike
Not for justification–that is certain. One thing we miss is that the Trinity is fully involved in both justification and sanctification. Christians, thanks to the Reformation, have really been dumbed-down in many areas with assumptions filling the gap. Christ is presently representing us at the Father’s side during our salvation–we assume that must be in regard to justification: Not so.
LikeLike
Paul,
If we debate, you will not be able to do what you have done above. You have made wild accusations without any documentation, badly misrepresented the Calvinists’ position, stated views that virtually no one believes, e.g., definitive sanctification is the Holy Spirit’s work in justification in setting us apart when the Father elected us. That is a complete misrepresentation of the Scriptural teaching re: sanctification, election, and justification.
Your statements are simply not true, and I don’t intend to spend any time, defending any position we Calvinist’s don’t hold.
LikeLike
Randy,
Debates are for the people, not your opinion. State your case and let the people decide. Is Dana Stoddard not a Calvinist? I wrote a whole article about his assertion that progressive sanctification and definitive sanctification are the same thing and he quotes Marshall to back his thesis. Stoddard clearly states that Christ’s perfect life was imputed to our sanctification in order to validate our justification. I have done the work–buy the book (Another Gospel pp. 28, 29) or shut up–it’s not my job to go running around digging up references for you–though I will have them all handy for the debate–you can be sure of that. Backing out Randy? What are you afraid of?
LikeLike
I am not afraid of anything. I am certainly not afraid of you. I am not going to buy a book I don’t want to read simply to search for a quote I don’t believe exists. Direct me to your article and show me where you have given a direct quote in its context. I don’t believe you have done that because you don’t quote what people actually say. You say what you think they mean. I have seen you do it time after time. That is why I insist on direct quotes. Otherwise, there will be no debate.
LikeLike
Right Randy. That’s why one of your rules for the debate is that I can’t bring up the title of the 14th chapter of book 3 in the Calvin Institutes because Calvin didn’t really mean “progressive justification” by “progressive justification.” Post more comments if you will–they will not be posted.
LikeLike